Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 17:09:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 17:09:31 -0400 Received: from mail.zmailer.org ([62.240.94.4]:51595 "EHLO mail.zmailer.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 17:09:30 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 00:15:35 +0300 From: Matti Aarnio To: Slavcho Nikolov Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: feature request - why not make netif_rx() a pointer? Message-ID: <20021022211535.GZ1111@mea-ext.zmailer.org> References: <00b201c27a0e$3f82c220$800a140a@SLNW2K> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00b201c27a0e$3f82c220$800a140a@SLNW2K> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1055 Lines: 24 On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 05:01:53PM -0400, Slavcho Nikolov wrote: > Non GPL modules that want to attach themselves between all L2 drivers and > upper layers would not have to incur a performance loss if netif_rx() is > made a pointer instead of a function (whether or not NET filters are > compiled in the kernel). > Currently control can be easily wrested from netif_rx() and others through > injection of a few instructions into the running kernel (SMC - self > modifying code) but decreased performance is one sad consequence. > Architecture specific maintenance of SMC slows down portability, > too. > The following suggestion would lead to the least amount of modifications. ftp://zmailer.org/linux/netif_rx.patch Done for 2.3.99-pre7-3 but should be easy to port to 2.5.x ... > S.N. /Matti Aarnio - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/